<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Thoughts on B. in A., Day One</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/</link>
	<description>Unity in charity, diversity in truth</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 23:21:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: JSP</title>
		<link>http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45424</link>
		<dc:creator>JSP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45424</guid>
		<description>I loved the Chick Corea influence on the papal Mass at National Stadium.  I can never get enough good jazz flute.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I loved the Chick Corea influence on the papal Mass at National Stadium.  I can never get enough good jazz flute.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad C</title>
		<link>http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45420</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45420</guid>
		<description>I think the Holy Father added some important clarifications on pluralism and freedom in his response to the American Bishops' questions:

&lt;i&gt;Of course, what is essential is a correct understanding of the just autonomy of the secular order, an autonomy which cannot be divorced from God the Creator and his saving plan (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 36). Perhaps America’s brand of secularism poses a particular problem: it allows for professing belief in God, and respects the public role of religion and the Churches, but at the same time it can subtly reduce religious belief to a lowest common denominator. Faith becomes a passive acceptance that certain things “out there” are true, but without practical relevance for everyday life. The result is a growing separation of faith from life: living “as if God did not exist”. This is aggravated by an individualistic and eclectic approach to faith and religion: far from a Catholic approach to “thinking with the Church”, each person believes he or she has a right to pick and choose, maintaining external social bonds but without an integral, interior conversion to the law of Christ. Consequently, rather than being transformed and renewed in mind, Christians are easily tempted to conform themselves to the spirit of this age (cf. Rom 12:3). We have seen this emerge in an acute way in the scandal given by Catholics who promote an alleged right to abortion. 

On a deeper level, secularism challenges the Church to reaffirm and to pursue more actively her mission in and to the world. As the Council made clear, the lay faithful have a particular responsibility in this regard. What is needed, I am convinced, is a greater sense of the intrinsic relationship between the Gospel and the natural law on the one hand, and, on the other, the pursuit of authentic human good, as embodied in civil law and in personal moral decisions. In a society that rightly values personal liberty, the Church needs to promote at every level of her teaching – in catechesis, preaching, seminary and university instruction – an apologetics aimed at affirming the truth of Christian revelation, the harmony of faith and reason, and a sound understanding of freedom, seen in positive terms as a liberation both from the limitations of sin and for an authentic and fulfilling life. In a word, the Gospel has to be preached and taught as an integral way of life, offering an attractive and true answer, intellectually and practically, to real human problems. The “dictatorship of relativism”, in the end, is nothing less than a threat to genuine human freedom, which only matures in generosity and fidelity to the truth.&lt;/i&gt;

That sounds quite a bit different from what he said at the White House.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the Holy Father added some important clarifications on pluralism and freedom in his response to the American Bishops&#8217; questions:</p>
<p><i>Of course, what is essential is a correct understanding of the just autonomy of the secular order, an autonomy which cannot be divorced from God the Creator and his saving plan (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 36). Perhaps America’s brand of secularism poses a particular problem: it allows for professing belief in God, and respects the public role of religion and the Churches, but at the same time it can subtly reduce religious belief to a lowest common denominator. Faith becomes a passive acceptance that certain things “out there” are true, but without practical relevance for everyday life. The result is a growing separation of faith from life: living “as if God did not exist”. This is aggravated by an individualistic and eclectic approach to faith and religion: far from a Catholic approach to “thinking with the Church”, each person believes he or she has a right to pick and choose, maintaining external social bonds but without an integral, interior conversion to the law of Christ. Consequently, rather than being transformed and renewed in mind, Christians are easily tempted to conform themselves to the spirit of this age (cf. Rom 12:3). We have seen this emerge in an acute way in the scandal given by Catholics who promote an alleged right to abortion. </p>
<p>On a deeper level, secularism challenges the Church to reaffirm and to pursue more actively her mission in and to the world. As the Council made clear, the lay faithful have a particular responsibility in this regard. What is needed, I am convinced, is a greater sense of the intrinsic relationship between the Gospel and the natural law on the one hand, and, on the other, the pursuit of authentic human good, as embodied in civil law and in personal moral decisions. In a society that rightly values personal liberty, the Church needs to promote at every level of her teaching – in catechesis, preaching, seminary and university instruction – an apologetics aimed at affirming the truth of Christian revelation, the harmony of faith and reason, and a sound understanding of freedom, seen in positive terms as a liberation both from the limitations of sin and for an authentic and fulfilling life. In a word, the Gospel has to be preached and taught as an integral way of life, offering an attractive and true answer, intellectually and practically, to real human problems. The “dictatorship of relativism”, in the end, is nothing less than a threat to genuine human freedom, which only matures in generosity and fidelity to the truth.</i></p>
<p>That sounds quite a bit different from what he said at the White House.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clara</title>
		<link>http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45415</link>
		<dc:creator>Clara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:10:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45415</guid>
		<description>I can never understand why you people are always so hard on Neuhaus and Arroyo. A little gentle ribbing would be one thing, but you.all seem to have a positive dislike for them which is silly. Though sometimes a little obvious in their remarks, they are basically on the right team and it isn't prudent to scorn your allies.As far as I'm concerned, Neuhaus can talk about modernity all he wants as long as he's disparaging it, which he always is.  
Durufle was a modernist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can never understand why you people are always so hard on Neuhaus and Arroyo. A little gentle ribbing would be one thing, but you.all seem to have a positive dislike for them which is silly. Though sometimes a little obvious in their remarks, they are basically on the right team and it isn&#8217;t prudent to scorn your allies.As far as I&#8217;m concerned, Neuhaus can talk about modernity all he wants as long as he&#8217;s disparaging it, which he always is.<br />
Durufle was a modernist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fransicus</title>
		<link>http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45413</link>
		<dc:creator>Fransicus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 14:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45413</guid>
		<description>Did anyone notice that Cardinal Mahoney's seat was prominently right in front of the Soverign Pontiff during the address?  And in the next row behind, Bishop Clark?  

I wonder if these seats were assigned...

I also enjoyed the choir and their choice of music.  At one point Raymond Arroyo asked Fr. Niehaus to be quiet and listen to the Durufle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did anyone notice that Cardinal Mahoney&#8217;s seat was prominently right in front of the Soverign Pontiff during the address?  And in the next row behind, Bishop Clark?  </p>
<p>I wonder if these seats were assigned&#8230;</p>
<p>I also enjoyed the choir and their choice of music.  At one point Raymond Arroyo asked Fr. Niehaus to be quiet and listen to the Durufle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: elmwood</title>
		<link>http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45359</link>
		<dc:creator>elmwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 06:26:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cornellsociety.org/2008/04/thoughts-on-b-in-a-day-one/#comment-45359</guid>
		<description>fr. neuhaus is so annoying. if i have to hear him talk about 'modernity' one more time i'm going to throw up. he comes across as if he's the expert of experts of all things catholic. 

it was great to see bush give the pope so much respect. makes me proud that i voted for him. for a while there i was pretty hard on him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>fr. neuhaus is so annoying. if i have to hear him talk about &#8216;modernity&#8217; one more time i&#8217;m going to throw up. he comes across as if he&#8217;s the expert of experts of all things catholic. </p>
<p>it was great to see bush give the pope so much respect. makes me proud that i voted for him. for a while there i was pretty hard on him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.767 seconds -->
